ArticleVeterinary record open2023
Experiences and recommendations of veterinarians for the Dutch disciplinary system-a survey-based study.
Article in Veterinary record open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complaints filed with the Veterinary Disciplinary Board in Sweden - a thematic analysis.BMC veterinary research · 2026Article
- A survey on opinions, perceptions and attitudes of Swedish veterinarians-the Swedish veterinary disciplinary board.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Experiences and recommendations of veterinarians for the Dutch disciplinary system-a survey-based study.Veterinary record open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In the Netherlands, the veterinary disciplinary system is governmentally executed and was originally designed to provide an educational effect on veterinarians as part of maintaining quality standards. Methods: Over 900 veterinarians were questioned (20% of the total number of veterinarians working in veterinary medicine in the Netherlands). It was ascertained whether or not they were aware of the disciplinary system, if it affected their way of working and what impact it had on their way of working after having faced a disciplinary case. Respondents were given the opportunity to express their opinions about the system and possible improvements. Results: The risk of complaints was found to be significantly greater when a veterinarian owned a practice compared to veterinarians who were employees. Veterinarians with their own practice were generally older (male) veterinarians. Whether this was a direct effect or just the effect of having a longer career could not be answered. Multiple disciplinary procedures appeared to have no influence. In 13%, veterinarians indicated that the disciplinary system had led to a more defensive way of practicing medicine to avoid complaints. Discussion and conclusions: Most veterinarians supported a disciplinary system as a tool for maintaining and improving the integrity and reputation of the profession as a whole. Recommendations to improve were (1) shortening the length of the procedure, (2) screening for validity, (3) using online systems for communication with the disciplinary council, (4) the option of mediation before getting involved in a full procedure and (5) instituting a complaint fee.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.